Psychology
There have been numerous studies by psychologists trying to explain as to what really shapes our personality. This brings about the much debated nature and nurture studies. The phrase nature and nurture refers to a discussion around the influence of heredity traits and the environmental conditions in shaping the personality of individuals. Earlier studies held the position that the personality of a child is greatly shaped by the child’s home environment. However, recently a different school of thought has emerged as is based on the study of identical twins revealing that heredity could be the greater determiner of personality. This paper seeks to explain the two schools of thoughts and the subjects, methods and traits being studied in them.
According to Goldhaber (2012), Intelligence of an individual is both inherited and learned. Research shows that about 50% of an individual’s intelligence is acquired from the parents genetically. On the other hand, the home environment can either enhance or inhibit the individual natural inherited intelligence. It has been known for long that some physical characteristics are determined biologically through genetic inheritance. Examples are the pigmentation of the skin, color of eyes, straight or curly hair, and certain diseases. Scholars who adopt the extreme heredity position called nativists.
Harold et al (2013), points out that studies of identical twins reared in different families have revealed that a child’s genetic makeup has stronger influence on their intelligence and personality than their upbringing. The findings have caused fierce debates among experts and scholars previously of the thought that greater influence on personality is on family influence. The findings were acquired from a long term study at the University of Minnesota in which more than 350 pairs of twins were involved in extensive testing. The Testing involved analysis of brain waves, intelligence, blood, and allergies of the subjects. The results revealed that for most of the traits analyzed, more than half the variations were as a result of heredity. Only less than half was found to result from influence by the home environment, parents, and other life experiences.
According to Harold et al (2013), although the findings in this study point to the strong effect of heredity, the family also has a part it plays in the shaping of personality offered through heredity. For instance, a family might contribute in elevating or minimizing innately acquired conditions such as timidity. However, according to this study the family is not likely to make the child brave. Among the 350 pairs of twins involved in the study included some who were raised in different families. Within the twins reared apart were 44 pairs identical and 21 pairs of fraternal twins. Harold et al (2013), notes that comparing twins raised in separate home environments with those raised within the same home environments enables the researchers to determine the role brought about by heredity and those that are caused by the environment in their development. However, some twins will definitely exhibit differences between them,
If environment was the basic influence to personality, then identical twins reared in the same home environment would be expected to exhibit more similarity than would their counterparts reared apart. However, the study of 11 personality traits found that differences between the kinds of twins were fewer than had been previously assumed. Therefore, it implies that a great level of personality is under genetic control. The traits were measured by use of a personality questionnaire (Wong and Edwards, 2013). A personality questionnaire is able to measure major aspects of personality such as strive for achievement, aggressiveness, and need for intimacy. Among traits that are strongly determined through heredity were obedience and leadership. Other traits that are more than 50 percent heredity included alienation, sense of well-being, resistance to stress, and zest for life (Wong and Edwards, 2013).
On the other of the spectrum we have the environmentalists also called the as empiricists. The basic assumption of this school of thought is that at birth the human mind is a blank slate. The human mind is then gradually filled through experience that is presented by an individual’s interaction with the environment (Wong and Edwards, 2013).
According to this point of view, therefore, the behavioral differences psychological characteristics that emerge from childhood are the result of the learning process. This implies that the psychologically significant aspects of development from childhood and the concept of maturation are shaped by the way we are brought up (Lewkowicz, 2011). For instance, when an infant forms an attachment to the mother, it is just responding to the attention and love it has received. In this case, language is developed from imitating the speech of others. The cognitive development is greatly determined by the degree of environmental stimulation and on the civilization in which the child is brought up (Lewkowicz, 2011)..
According to Goldhaber (2012), an example of environmental studies is the 1969 Bowlby’s theory of attachment. According to the theory the bond between a mother and a child is an innate process that ensures survival. 1977 Bandura’s theory of learning theory argues that aggression is a learnt trait from the environment by observation and imitation as is demonstrated in his bobo doll experiment. For many environmentalists the I.Q scores difference of ethnic groups is as a result of inbuilt biases in the testing methods. More fundamentally differences in intellectual ability result from inequalities in accessing material opportunities and resources. According to environmentalists children brought up in the slums tend to score lower on I.Q tests because they have no access to the same life chances as to those from the privileged society (Goldhaber, 2012).
In practice today, hardly anyone would tend to accept either of the extreme positions. So instead of one asking whether the development 0f a child is attributed to nature or nurture the question has been reformulated to how much influence each has on the same. This therefore implies that both heredity and environment have a role to play in shaping the individual. Studies of identical twins have revealed that heredity has great influence on most of the developmental processes that shapes our personality. Consequently, part of the developmental process is shaped by the home environment one is reared in.
References
Goldhaber, D. (2012). The Nature-nurture Debate : Bridging the Gap. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harold, G. T., Leve, L. D., Elam, K. K., Thapar, A., Neiderhiser, J. M., Natsuaki, M. N., & … Reiss, D. (2013). The nature of nurture: Disentangling passive genotype–environment correlation from family relationship influences on children’s externalizing problems. Journal Of Family Psychology, 27(1), 12-21.
Lewkowicz, D. J. (2011). The Biological Implausibility of the Nature-Nurture Dichotomy and What It Means for the Study of Infancy. Infancy, 16(4), 331-367.
Wong, H., & Edwards, P. (2013). Nature or Nurture: A Systematic Review of the Effect of Socio-economic Status on the Developmental and Cognitive Outcomes of Children Born Preterm. Maternal & Child Health Journal, 17(9), 1689-1700.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]